TY - JOUR
T1 - Static and Fatigue Mechanical Performance of Abutments Materials for Dental Restorations
AU - Bruno, Luigi
AU - Canullo, Luigi
AU - Mayer, Yaniv
AU - Schoenbaum, Todd
AU - Giuzio, Francesco
AU - Maletta, Carmine
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 by the authors.
PY - 2023/5
Y1 - 2023/5
N2 - The choice of the proper restorative material is essential for the long-term success of implant-supported rehabilitations. This study aimed to analyze and compare the mechanical properties of four different types of commercial abutment materials for implant-supported restorations. These materials included: lithium disilicate (A), translucent zirconia (B), fiber-reinforced polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) (C), and ceramic-reinforced polyether ether ketone (PEEK) (D). Tests were carried out under combined bending–compression conditions, which involved applying a compressive force tilted with respect to the abutment axis. Static and fatigue tests were performed on two different geometries for each material, and the results were analyzed according to ISO standard 14801:2016. Monotonic loads were applied to measure static strength, whereas alternating loads with a frequency of 10 Hz and a runout of 5 × 106 cycles were applied for fatigue life estimation, corresponding to five years of clinical service. Fatigue tests were carried out with a load ratio of 0.1 and at least four load levels for each material, and the peak value of the load levels was reduced accordingly in subsequent levels. The results showed that the static and fatigue strengths of Type A and Type B materials were better than those of Type C and Type D. Moreover, the fiber-reinforced polymer material, Type C, showed marked material–geometry coupling. The study revealed that the final properties of the restoration depended on manufacturing techniques and the operator’s experience. The findings of this study can be used to inform clinicians’ choice of restorative materials for implant-supported rehabilitation, considering factors such as esthetics, mechanical properties, and cost.
AB - The choice of the proper restorative material is essential for the long-term success of implant-supported rehabilitations. This study aimed to analyze and compare the mechanical properties of four different types of commercial abutment materials for implant-supported restorations. These materials included: lithium disilicate (A), translucent zirconia (B), fiber-reinforced polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) (C), and ceramic-reinforced polyether ether ketone (PEEK) (D). Tests were carried out under combined bending–compression conditions, which involved applying a compressive force tilted with respect to the abutment axis. Static and fatigue tests were performed on two different geometries for each material, and the results were analyzed according to ISO standard 14801:2016. Monotonic loads were applied to measure static strength, whereas alternating loads with a frequency of 10 Hz and a runout of 5 × 106 cycles were applied for fatigue life estimation, corresponding to five years of clinical service. Fatigue tests were carried out with a load ratio of 0.1 and at least four load levels for each material, and the peak value of the load levels was reduced accordingly in subsequent levels. The results showed that the static and fatigue strengths of Type A and Type B materials were better than those of Type C and Type D. Moreover, the fiber-reinforced polymer material, Type C, showed marked material–geometry coupling. The study revealed that the final properties of the restoration depended on manufacturing techniques and the operator’s experience. The findings of this study can be used to inform clinicians’ choice of restorative materials for implant-supported rehabilitation, considering factors such as esthetics, mechanical properties, and cost.
KW - abutment
KW - dental implant
KW - fatigue strength
KW - mechanical characterization
KW - static strength
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85160588216&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85160588216&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/ma16103713
DO - 10.3390/ma16103713
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85160588216
SN - 1996-1944
VL - 16
JO - Materials
JF - Materials
IS - 10
M1 - 3713
ER -